ASA ruling against package holiday provider

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) have upheld a complaint against On The Beach Ltd that they mislead consumers by using a comparison with an identifiable competitor, and that consumers were not adequately signposted to verification information following an email advertisement.

The email contained the subject line, “Found: your identical holiday for £592 less. Text in the body of the email stated, “We compared. We conquered […] Deal of the Week We’re £592 cheaper. We’re £592 cheaper than easyJet holidays for this jolly departing on 16th September 2025. Reveal this deal”. Smaller text at the end of the email stated, “Terms & Conditions *2 Adults: Package holiday price comparison with easyJet holidays, conducted on 18th August 2025 at 10:02 for 2 adults travelling on 16th September 2025 for 7 nights, from London Luton Airport for a Self-Catering board basis to Muthu Clube Praia da Oura, Portugal. Flights provided by Ryanair. Outbound Flight departing at 18:25 and Inbound Flight departing at 21:40. Price checked includes in-resort transfers, 2x hold baggage and standard hand luggage. Prices are dynamic and are subject to change. Price comparison may not take into account any promotional savings. *Subject to availability and booking conditions apply. The price may fluctuate due to demand. Prices correct on 20/08/25, based on two persons travelling on the same booking. 

On The Beach argued that the basis of comparison within the ad was clear as it contained all of the features of the two holidays, and it stated that the prices may fluctuate. They also added that using Ryanair for flights rather than easyJet did not invalidate the claim as both were low-cost carriers on the same route offering equivalent transport. Finally On The Beach stated that they did not include easyJet holidays’ £100 promotional discount because promotional codes often carried various eligibility restrictions.

ASA upheld the complaints, considering that consumers would understand from the email that the holidays were identical, and that the saving would be available upon clicking the call-to-action button. ASA also stated that the packages were not identical as promotional savings were excluded from the comparison, therefore not providing a “like-for-like” basis. Finally, the advertisement did not make it clear how quick the consumer would have to act to benefit from the deal, as the day after the email was sent, On The Beach’s holiday was over £900 higher than it was at the time of the email.